Difference between revisions of "Main Page"
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_real_numbers says: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_real_numbers says: | ||
| − | + | {{Quotation| | |
Although the symbols {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{+}}\mathbb {R} _{+} and {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{+}}{\mathbb {R}}^{{+}} are ambiguously used for either of these, the notation {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{+}}\mathbb {R} _{+} or {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{+}}{\mathbb {R}}^{{+}} for {\displaystyle \left\{x\in \mathbb {R} \mid x\geq 0\right\}}{\displaystyle \left\{x\in \mathbb {R} \mid x\geq 0\right\}} and {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{+}^{*}}{\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{+}^{*}} or {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{*}^{+}}{\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{*}^{+}} for {\displaystyle \left\{x\in \mathbb {R} \mid x>0\right\}}{\displaystyle \left\{x\in \mathbb {R} \mid x>0\right\}} has also been widely employed, is aligned with the practice in algebra of denoting the exclusion of the zero element with a star, and should be understandable to most practicing mathematicians. | Although the symbols {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{+}}\mathbb {R} _{+} and {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{+}}{\mathbb {R}}^{{+}} are ambiguously used for either of these, the notation {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{+}}\mathbb {R} _{+} or {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{+}}{\mathbb {R}}^{{+}} for {\displaystyle \left\{x\in \mathbb {R} \mid x\geq 0\right\}}{\displaystyle \left\{x\in \mathbb {R} \mid x\geq 0\right\}} and {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{+}^{*}}{\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{+}^{*}} or {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{*}^{+}}{\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{*}^{+}} for {\displaystyle \left\{x\in \mathbb {R} \mid x>0\right\}}{\displaystyle \left\{x\in \mathbb {R} \mid x>0\right\}} has also been widely employed, is aligned with the practice in algebra of denoting the exclusion of the zero element with a star, and should be understandable to most practicing mathematicians. | ||
| + | }} | ||
Robin Hanson in [https://www.econlib.org/you-dont-understand-our-culture/?fbclid=IwAR1Oy7VUH0iAUFS-xk62hvd-yR8gsv2eiE7plNJSdng1s-dqEBfh1HyZLrU You Don't Understand Our Culture] says | Robin Hanson in [https://www.econlib.org/you-dont-understand-our-culture/?fbclid=IwAR1Oy7VUH0iAUFS-xk62hvd-yR8gsv2eiE7plNJSdng1s-dqEBfh1HyZLrU You Don't Understand Our Culture] says | ||
| Line 28: | Line 29: | ||
D. Bnonn Tennant [https://twitter.com/bnonn/status/1307978280440459264 says on Twitter]: | D. Bnonn Tennant [https://twitter.com/bnonn/status/1307978280440459264 says on Twitter]: | ||
| − | When women hold power in a church, officially or unofficially, two things happen: (1) They strive to include anyone agreeable, regardless of error; (2) They strive to exclude anyone disagreeable, regardless of orthodoxy. | + | {{Quotation| |
| + | When women hold power in a church, officially or unofficially, two things happen: (1) They strive to include anyone agreeable, regardless of error; (2) They strive to exclude anyone disagreeable, regardless of orthodoxy. | ||
This is how women are designed, and it is good—in its proper context. This is why the proper context for feminine influence is under masculine rulership. False teachers are experts at being agreeable; men mimicking Jesus and the prophets are highly proficient at the other thing. | This is how women are designed, and it is good—in its proper context. This is why the proper context for feminine influence is under masculine rulership. False teachers are experts at being agreeable; men mimicking Jesus and the prophets are highly proficient at the other thing. | ||
In an ecclesial context, therefore, women's social instincts are roughly inversely proportional to ensuring orthodoxy. Women are likely to approve and endorse flatterers, hirelings, soft men; likely to disapprove and ostracize truth-tellers, shepherds, tough men. | In an ecclesial context, therefore, women's social instincts are roughly inversely proportional to ensuring orthodoxy. Women are likely to approve and endorse flatterers, hirelings, soft men; likely to disapprove and ostracize truth-tellers, shepherds, tough men. | ||
| − | + | }} | |
---- | ---- | ||
Revision as of 18:18, 23 September 2020
This is the main page for Rasmapedia. It is what you reach with http://rasmusen.org/rasmapedia.
Some Pages
C. P. Snow, Good Judgement and Winston Churchill
Machiavelli, W.E.B. Du Bois, and Their Friends
Notes
Do varietal wines, e.g. pure cabernet sauvignon, make sense? It seems like a blend of grapes with different properties *has* to be better, e.g. one for color, one for aroma, one for body. Is it that with the varietal, at least one knows there's no rotgut cheap grape involved?
It may be useful to have a “dump document” or "junk file" where you put your discards that you cut out of the paper you are working on. Keeping old draft is a separate good thing to do. Name your working document 12a-piesplitting.txt, and your dump document 00dump-piesplitting.txt, and your notes file 00piesplitting.txt.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_real_numbers says:
Although the symbols {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{+
\mathbb {R} _{+} and {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{+}}{\mathbb {R}}^Template:+ are ambiguously used for either of these, the notation {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{+}}\mathbb {R} _{+} or {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{+}}{\mathbb {R}}^Template:+ for {\displaystyle \left\{x\in \mathbb {R} \mid x\geq 0\right\}}{\displaystyle \left\{x\in \mathbb {R} \mid x\geq 0\right\}} and {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{+}^{*}}{\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{+}^{*}} or {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{*}^{+}}{\displaystyle \mathbb {R} _{*}^{+}} for {\displaystyle \left\{x\in \mathbb {R} \mid x>0\right\}}{\displaystyle \left\{x\in \mathbb {R} \mid x>0\right\}} has also been widely employed, is aligned with the practice in algebra of denoting the exclusion of the zero element with a star, and should be understandable to most practicing mathematicians.
}}
Robin Hanson in You Don't Understand Our Culture says
What are the key differences between GMU econ blogger culture and mainstream intellectual culture?
D. Bnonn Tennant says on Twitter:
When women hold power in a church, officially or unofficially, two things happen: (1) They strive to include anyone agreeable, regardless of error; (2) They strive to exclude anyone disagreeable, regardless of orthodoxy.
This is how women are designed, and it is good—in its proper context. This is why the proper context for feminine influence is under masculine rulership. False teachers are experts at being agreeable; men mimicking Jesus and the prophets are highly proficient at the other thing.
In an ecclesial context, therefore, women's social instincts are roughly inversely proportional to ensuring orthodoxy. Women are likely to approve and endorse flatterers, hirelings, soft men; likely to disapprove and ostracize truth-tellers, shepherds, tough men.
